Activists on both sides of the political spectrum have expressed outrage over the actions of Obama’s National Security Agency. After whistleblower Edward Snowden released a significant amount of information exposing the agency’s widespread collection of information related to domestic phone calls, many Americans called for an end to the practice.

A federal judge ruled Friday, however, that the program is valid and legal. The decision bolsters the NSA’s position that collecting data from millions of people across the globe is integral to maintaining safety at home.

Advertisement - story continues below

While almost everyone recognizes the necessity of targeted spying in order to pinpoint potential attacks before they occur, many feel the NSA is merely stockpiling as much information as possible without any justification.

U.S. District Judge William Pauley disagreed. In his ruling, he contended the program is “the government’s counter-punch” against terrorist cells throughout the Middle East and beyond. Furthermore, he speculated that, had the practice been in effect prior to Sept. 11, 2001, the most deadly attack in U.S. history could have been prevented.

Using theoretical hindsight to make his point is an effective debate tactic; but those concerned with retaining some semblance of privacy and liberty still view the NSA program as needlessly intrusive.

Advertisement - story continues below

The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit challenging the practice, which Pauley dismissed in his ruling.

ACLU Deputy Legal Director Jameel Jaffer issued a statement, explaining the organization is “extremely disappointed with this decision, which misinterprets the relevant statues, understates the privacy implications of the government’s surveillance and misapplies a narrow and outdated precedent to read away core constitutional protections.”

The group plans to appeal Pauley’s motion to dismiss the suit.

Certainly, there are Americans more than willing to cede control of their lives to the government in exchange for some abstract promise of domestic tranquility. For many others, this court decision marks yet another blow to the individual freedoms for which America has always been known.